OBJECTIVES: This study had three aims: (1) to independently replicate the future thinking effect, that parasuicides, when compared with controls, show a deficit in positive future thinking but no increase in negative future thinking; (2) to determine whether positive future thinking and socially prescribed perfectionism discriminate general hospital parasuicides from controls beyond measures of affect and; (3) to explore the relationship between future thinking and perfectionism. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was employed. Three groups of participants took part: hospital parasuicide patients (N=22), hospital controls (N=22) and community controls (N=21). METHODS: Parasuicide patients admitted, via accident and emergency, to a general hospital were matched with hospital and community controls and assessed on measures of hopelessness, depression, anxiety, perfectionism, and future thinking. RESULTS: There was evidence to support the future thinking effect. A discriminant function analysis revealed that social perfectionism and positive future thinking did indeed discriminate parasuicides from controls beyond the effects of hopelessness, depression, and anxiety. Exploratory relationships between perfectionism and positive future thinking were also reported. CONCLUSIONS: The results reinforce the importance of future thinking in parasuicide. Moreover, the role of social perfectionism in the suicidal process was elucidated and ought to be replicated within a prospective design.
OBJECTIVES: This study had three aims: (1) to independently replicate the future thinking effect, that parasuicides, when compared with controls, show a deficit in positive future thinking but no increase in negative future thinking; (2) to determine whether positive future thinking and socially prescribed perfectionism discriminate general hospital parasuicides from controls beyond measures of affect and; (3) to explore the relationship between future thinking and perfectionism. DESIGN: A cross-sectional design was employed. Three groups of participants took part: hospital parasuicide patients (N=22), hospital controls (N=22) and community controls (N=21). METHODS: Parasuicide patients admitted, via accident and emergency, to a general hospital were matched with hospital and community controls and assessed on measures of hopelessness, depression, anxiety, perfectionism, and future thinking. RESULTS: There was evidence to support the future thinking effect. A discriminant function analysis revealed that social perfectionism and positive future thinking did indeed discriminate parasuicides from controls beyond the effects of hopelessness, depression, and anxiety. Exploratory relationships between perfectionism and positive future thinking were also reported. CONCLUSIONS: The results reinforce the importance of future thinking in parasuicide. Moreover, the role of social perfectionism in the suicidal process was elucidated and ought to be replicated within a prospective design.
Authors: Brontë Mckeown; Giulia L Poerio; Will H Strawson; Léa M Martinon; Leigh M Riby; Elizabeth Jefferies; Cade McCall; Jonathan Smallwood Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2021-10-05 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Christine B Cha; Donald J Robinaugh; Daniel L Schacter; Gizem Altheimer; Brian P Marx; Terence M Keane; Jaclyn C Kearns; Matthew K Nock Journal: Suicide Life Threat Behav Date: 2022-01-03
Authors: Patricia A Gooding; Daniel Pratt; Yvonne Awenat; Richard Drake; Rachel Elliott; Richard Emsley; Charlotte Huggett; Steven Jones; Navneet Kapur; Fiona Lobban; Sarah Peters; Gillian Haddock Journal: BMC Psychiatry Date: 2020-06-16 Impact factor: 3.630
Authors: Tyler Pia; Igor Galynker; Allison Schuck; Courtney Sinclair; Gelan Ying; Raffaella Calati Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-02-22 Impact factor: 3.390